New terminology found here, we think it's pretty self-explanatory, but here's the definition (Work in progress but mostly figured out) just in case:

Spoiler(hover to show)

Quote

Keyword: Advantage

Format of keyword: "Attribute" Advantage / "Location" Advantage

Definition: For "Attribute" Advantage, the player who controls the highest number of cards with the chosen "attribute" has Advantage. Because this looks at cards you own and control, cards in set-aside areas are included. For "Location" Advantage, the player who owns and controls the highest number of cards in that location has Advantage.

Additional notes:

In the event of a tie, no player has the advantage.

Lost Souls and Redeemed Souls are excluded from all "advantage" definitions, except for the specific cases of "Lost Soul Advantage" and "Redeemed Soul Advantage".

Example: "Hand advantage" belongs to the player with the most cards in hand.

Example: "Character advantage" belongs to the player with the most characters in play and set-aside.

Example: "Territory advantage" belongs to the player with the most cards in territory (excluding Lost Souls).

Example: "Redeemed Soul advantage" belongs to the player with the most Redeemed Souls in their LoR.

Special case: "Board advantage" counts all non-Lost Soul/Redeemed Soul cards in territory, the field of battle, set-aside, and Land of Redemption.

I’m curious why the other dual alignment animals have two evil brigades on the character side, but The Great Fish doesn’t? It seems like PG/Crimson would make sense in this case in the same way that I am sure Fire Foxes has black due to the relation to Philistines (while not being a Philistine character).

Thoughts?

You’re thinking of Leviathan and Behemoth, both of which are Job evil Characters. Job evil Characters are brown, hence the brown and crimson. Same logic with Firefoxes, as you cited, and Magicians’ Snakes (FoM).

I’d disagree with the PG being added to TGF as he’s not directly associated with Assyria. But I can see your argument for PG being added due to the association with Jonah/Jonah story as the Job animals are associated with Job/book of Job.

Watchman is pretty much spot on. Lions lived in Perisa (brown). Fire Foxes were from Philistia (black). Coliseum Lions were under Roman control (gray). Stubborn Heifer is metephorical of Israelites (brown).

PG isn’t really the “evil Jonah” brigade the way brown is the "evil Job" brigade. It’s just that all the evil Jonah stuff we’ve printed thus far is Assyrian or lived in Assyria (The Worm). The Great Fish didn’t originate in Assyria as wasn’t associated with it in any way. It ended up there by divine direction. If we were to print the sailors from the ship to Tarshish, they probably wouldn’t be PG, they would be whatever brigade is associated with their region, nationality or heritage (I haven't look into it). It doesn’t seem to me like the fish should be pale green either. I'm not totally against the idea. But I think it's quite a stretch for the sake of making a card do what we want (working in tandem with Assyrians) instead of what it should (represent an animal not associated with Assyria).

The Assyrian's did worship a "fish god" of sorts so perhaps that is the link that would make Pale Green make sense. Again, not necessarily for it but the fish is the odd man out in my Jonah deck when it comes to enhancements.

New terminology found here, we think it's pretty self-explanatory, but here's the definition (Work in progress but mostly figured out) just in case:

Spoiler(hover to show)

Quote

Keyword: Advantage

Format of keyword: "Attribute" Advantage / "Location" Advantage

Definition: For "Attribute" Advantage, the player who controls the highest number of cards with the chosen "attribute" has Advantage. Because this looks at cards you own and control, cards in set-aside areas are included. For "Location" Advantage, the player who owns and controls the highest number of cards in that location has Advantage.

Additional notes:

In the event of a tie, no player has the advantage.

Lost Souls and Redeemed Souls are excluded from all "advantage" definitions, except for the specific cases of "Lost Soul Advantage" and "Redeemed Soul Advantage".

Example: "Hand advantage" belongs to the player with the most cards in hand.

Example: "Character advantage" belongs to the player with the most characters in play and set-aside.

Example: "Territory advantage" belongs to the player with the most cards in territory (excluding Lost Souls).

Example: "Redeemed Soul advantage" belongs to the player with the most Redeemed Souls in their LoR.

Special case: "Board advantage" counts all non-Lost Soul/Redeemed Soul cards in territory, the field of battle, set-aside, and Land of Redemption.

I love it. This Jonah theme seems to have quite a bit of territory control. I just hope that advantage is mostly used for negative feedback loops (catch-up mechanics like this one) rather than positive ones (win-more mechanics that would give benefits if you have advantage).

That said, I'm going to reiterate that I would like this card a lot more if Ninevites Repent said "if an Assyrian is in battle" instead of "if opposed by". Since there aren't any other Assyrian heroes and not very many green/white enhancements, it seems like a good way to incentivize this theme more (although it might require a numbers change on King's hero side so that it's harder to get initiative)

I’m curious why the other dual alignment animals have two evil brigades on the character side, but The Great Fish doesn’t? It seems like PG/Crimson would make sense in this case in the same way that I am sure Fire Foxes has black due to the relation to Philistines (while not being a Philistine character).

Thoughts?

You’re thinking of Leviathan and Behemoth, both of which are Job evil Characters. Job evil Characters are brown, hence the brown and crimson. Same logic with Firefoxes, as you cited, and Magicians’ Snakes (FoM).

I’d disagree with the PG being added to TGF as he’s not directly associated with Assyria. But I can see your argument for PG being added due to the association with Jonah/Jonah story as the Job animals are associated with Job/book of Job.

Watchman is pretty much spot on. Lions lived in Perisa (brown). Fire Foxes were from Philistia (black). Coliseum Lions were under Roman control (gray). Stubborn Heifer is metephorical of Israelites (brown).

PG isn’t really the “evil Jonah” brigade the way brown is the "evil Job" brigade. It’s just that all the evil Jonah stuff we’ve printed thus far is Assyrian or lived in Assyria (The Worm). The Great Fish didn’t originate in Assyria as wasn’t associated with it in any way. It ended up there by divine direction. If we were to print the sailors from the ship to Tarshish, they probably wouldn’t be PG, they would be whatever brigade is associated with their region, nationality or heritage (I haven't look into it). It doesn’t seem to me like the fish should be pale green either. I'm not totally against the idea. But I think it's quite a stretch for the sake of making a card do what we want (working in tandem with Assyrians) instead of what it should (represent an animal not associated with Assyria).

I was coming more from a stance of how Leviathan/Behemoth are associated with the story. I also can see the argument that The Great Fish did not live in Assyria, but also feel like it is a strong association to the Assyrians in God’s purpose for sending Jonah and using The Great Fish to accomplish that end.

In regard to Travis’ comment, if we added a brigade due to worship of a Fish god, it would need to be orange and a completely different card.

Dagon who was worshiped by Assyrians and Philistines. Please see an excerpt from the Wikipedia entry on the subject:

Quote

The "fish" etymology was accepted in 19th and early 20th century scholarship. This led to the association with the "merman" motif in Assyrian and Phoenician art (e.g. Julius Wellhausen, William Robertson Smith),[citation needed] and with the figure of the Babylonian Oannes (Ὡάννης) mentioned by Berossus (3rd century BC).

The first to cast doubt on the "fish" etymology was Schmökel (1928), who suggested that while Dagon was not in origin a "fish god", the association with dâg "fish" among the maritime Canaanites (Phoenicians) would have affected the god's iconography.[9] Fontenrose (1957:278) still suggests that Berossos's Odakon, part man and part fish, was possibly a garbled version of Dagon. Dagon was also equated with Oannes.

The association with dāg/dâg 'fish' is made by 11th-century Jewish Bible commentator Rashi.[10] In the 13th century, David Kimhi interpreted the odd sentence in 1 Samuel 5.2–7 that "only Dagon was left to him" to mean "only the form of a fish was left", adding: "It is said that Dagon, from his navel down, had the form of a fish (whence his name, Dagon), and from his navel up, the form of a man, as it is said, his two hands were cut off." The Septuagint text of 1 Samuel 5.2–7 says that both the hands and the head of the image of Dagon were broken off.[11]

But this "only" explains the deity of Mesopotamia and Canaanites worhipped by Assyria and others.

The card and scripture refers to the fish which was sent by God to get Jonah to Niniveh - not to a pagan deity!If you imply that God sent Dagon to fulfill that task then it has to become a 2nd evil brigade IMHO - referring to that Wiki excerpt it should either be black (since Canaanite deity) or PG (since Assyria worshipped it). But I never understood that part of Jonah as an tutoring that God has power over the pagan deities like Dagon.

If we were to print the sailors from the ship to Tarshish, they probably wouldn’t be PG, they would be whatever brigade is associated with their region, nationality or heritage (I haven't look into it).

I'm pretty sure the Bible is unclear on exactly what nationality they were, but considering they were leaving from Jaffa (a port city in Israel) and they were going to Tarshish (a place that we can't be sure exactly where it was), we can take clues from other parts of the Bible where it talks about Solomon sending ships along with King Hiram of Phoenicia to Tarshish to get all sorts of treasures. So it's possible it is one of those ships, and if the sailors weren't Israelite (I think Jonah says they prayed to their various gods) then Phoenician would be a good second choice (it also helps that the Phoenicians were well known sailors of the Mediterranean). But this is mostly circumstantial evidence.